High Court · 2025

4. Audit Officer, State Audit Premises of Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Vari Devastanam, Yadagirigutta, Yadadri Bhongir District ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not releasing family pension and other retirement benefits for the service rendered by Akunuri Anjaiah (husband of the 1st Petitioner) Gajwelli Balaiah (husband of the 2nd Petitioner) and Chintapatla Ramachary husband of the 3rd Petitioner) in terms of G.O.Ms.No.B39, Revenue Endowments-ll) Department, dated 3-'12-1999 and as per the letter in D.Dis.No. A1145705112OO4, dated 12-1)-2004 of the 2nd Respondent herein and as per the statement given in 1re Counter filed in W.P.No.22157 of 2005 as wholly illegal, arbitrary, violative : Articles 14, 16 and 2'1 of the Constitution of lndia besides being violative of rrinciples of natural Justice and consequently declare that the Petitioners are errl tled for pension and other retirement benefits with interest. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ci r the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court r direct the Respondents to release pension and other retirr: Petitioners in terms of G.O.Ms.No.839. Revenue (Endowrr dated 3-12-1999, as per the letter in D.Dis.No. A1l45i( '10-2004 of the 2nd Respondent herein and as per the slz Counter filed in W.P.No 22157 ol 2005, pending disposal of I umstances stated in ay be pleased to to nent benefits to the )nts-ll) Department. 5112004. dated 12- tement given in the e W.P. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI KIRTHI TEJA KONDAVEETI Counsel for the Respondents No.1&2 : GP FOR SERVICES ll Counsel for the Respondents No.3&4 : SRI CH.SATISH KUMAR,S ] FOR TEMPLE The Court made the following: ORDER - HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA ITP TITION N o.32 50 F 2023 ORDER Heard Sri Kirthi Teja Kondaveeti, learned counsel appearrng on behalf of the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Services-Il appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Sri Ch.Satish Kumar, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.3 & 4.

2. Th e as under: r hed ec s a er "...to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not releasing fimily pension and other retirement benefits for the service rendered by Akunuri Anjaiah (husband of the 1't Petitioner) Gajwelli Balaiah (husband of the 2nd Pe,titioner) and Chintapatla Ramachary (husband of the ] " Petitioner) in terms of G.O.Ms.No.B39 Revenue (Endowments-Il) Department, dated 3.12.1999 and as per the tetter in D.Dis.No.A1l45705//2004 dated 12.lO.2OO4 of the 2nd Respondent herein and as per the statement given in the Counter filed in W.p.No.22157 of 2005 as wholly illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India besides being violative of principles of natural Justice and consequenUy declare that the petitioners are entitled for pension and other retirement benefits with interest and pass...,, 2 SN. J The titi ner ,s Der averments made in th affid vl filed b t e ) :titioners ln ti nl su dr: :- nt Writ It is specific case of the petitioners that the h I ;bands of the ,,t, 2''d petitioner were appointed in the 3rd respc ident temple as Jamedar (Last Grade Service) on 01 12'1!52' and the husband of the 3'd petitioner as Assistant Archaka r n 01'04 1980 respectively. The husband of the 1st petitioner p';sed away on 02.03.1992 whiie in service, and the 1't 1''retitic rer was paid Provident Fund and Gratuity. The lrusbands of tlrr 2nd and 3rd petitioners retired volunta rilY on 04.04.1993 ar I 01.04.1980 respectively. While the 2nd petitioner's hust and received Provident Fund and Gratuity, the same was not f aid to the 3t-d petitioner or her husband. The Government of the erstwhile State of l'r dhra Pradesh' through G.O.Ms.No.B39, Revenue (Endowments-l ) Department' its to temPle dated 03.12.1999, extended pensionary bent: employees, including those who retired prior to the said G.O. In pursuance of this, the 1st husband of the 2nd petitioner, and the husbz petitioner submitted representations on 2( rd of the 3rd .02.2004 and he issuance of petitioner, the 7 J s\, J 31,03.2004 respectively, seeking pensionary and other retirement benefits, undertaking to refund the Provident Fund and Gratuity amounts already received. It is further the case of the petitioners that the petitioners earlier approached the High Court in W.P.No.22157 ot 2OO5, which was closed on 3O.12.2022 after the respondents admitted that sanctioning of pension was under process. The husbands of the 2nd and 3'd petitioners passed away in 1O.O5.2011 and 10.05.2006, respectively. The petitioners again represented on 26.02.2023, but no action was taken. Despite several requests made by the petitioners herein to the respondents, the respondents didn't take any action as per G.O.Ms.No.839, Revenue (Endowments-U) Department, dated 03.12.1999. Hence, the petitioners filed the present writ petition seeking release of family pension and other retirement benefits.

4. PERUSED THE RECORD A oft he Commissioner, Endowments Deoartment, D.Dis.No.All457OSl2OO4, f dated 12.1O.2OO4 is extracted hereunder;- { sN..r In the circumstatlces reported by the E> r Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Devasthanam, ya,J since ttle Audit Department has given clarifica: is hereby accorded to the Executive Officer temple to send the Service Registers of the .r employees of the Devasthanam for fixation I as per G.0.839, Revnue (Ends.II) Depit 3.12.1999 to the ALrdit Officer, Nalgonda. cutive Officer, rgirigutta and ln, permission rf the su bject llowing retired their Pe nsion tmeni, dated

1. Late Sri. Akunuri Anjaiah, Jamedar 2. Sri G. Ba la ia h, -lamedar 3. Sri Ch.Ramachary, Tenkaya Kottu Swarry The Executive Officer of the fu rther actio n accordingly. subject ter')le shall ta ke D rsc U SSION AND CONCLUSION:-

5. Learned counsel appearing on t petitioners submits that on an earlier c petitioners along with two others approaclr ehalf of the ccasion, the :d this Court by filing W.P.No.22157 of 2005 questioning the 3'd respondent temple, not sending Registers to the 4th respondent herein, ihe action of the service in spite of permission accorded by the 2"d responderrt herein vide D.Dis.No.A1 / 457 OS / 2OO4, dated 1 2. 10.2OO4 rs illegal and arbitrary, the said writ petition filed by tr was disposed by this Court vide its l petitioners lrder, dated L3.L2.2O22 observing as under;- --7 5 SN. J

2. The Executive Officer of the respondent No.2 filed the counter stating that they submitted service registers to the Audit Officer i.e., the respondent No.3 and the respondent No.3 in turn returned the service books along with the proceedings stating that they shall be paid as per the pension scheme, as contemplated in G.O.Ms.No.839, dated 03.12.1999 of the Government of Andhra Pradesh.

3. In view of the same, the grievance of the petitioners have already considered and redressed by the respondent No.2 temple. Therefore, no further orders need be passed in this Writ Petition. 6 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners mainly contends that in the counter affidavit filed in the said writ petition No.22157 of 2OO5 on behalf of the respondent No.2 temple therein at para No,5, it was specifically stated that the Executive Officer submitted service registers to Audit Officer and Audit Officer in turn returned the service books along with the proceedings stating that petitioners in the said Writ Petation shall be paid as per the pension scheme, as contemplated ln G.O.Ms.No.839, dated 03.12.1999 of the Government of Andhra Pradesh, after that the proceedings were sent to the Commissioner of Endowments-respondent No.2 herein and in turn the Commissioner entrusted the same to the Additional Commissioner and the matter had been finalized by the 2nd respondent herein. -- 6 SN. J

7. Learned counsel appearing on I ehalf of the petitioners contends that prayer as souglt for by the petitioners in the present Writ petition reeds to be allowed and the respondents may be direct( d to release pension and other retirement benefits fc I the service rendered by Akunuri Anjaiah(husband of the 1.t petitioner), Gajwelli Balaiah (husband of the 2nd petitioner) Chintapatla Ramachary (husbarC of the 3.d petitioner) in terms of G.O.Ms.No.8., ), Revenue (Endowment-Il) Department, dated 03.12, .999 and as per the letter, dated 12.1O.2004 of the 2nd r.:spondent as stated in the counter affidavit fited by the lt c respondent herein in W.P.No. No.22157 of 2OO5. 8 Learned standing counsel appeariig or behalf of the respondent Temple contends that the re< uest of the petitioners as put-forth in the present Writ l) ]tition would be considered as per the instructions issued vide proceedings in D.Dis.No.Al /4S7OS/21))4t dated L2.LO.2OO4 of office of the Commissioner, Endowment Department, within a reasonable period. 7 SN, J 9 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners does not dispute the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the responde nts. 1O. Takanq into consideration:- a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case. b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.3- Temple c) The averments made in the counter affidavit filed on belralf of the respondent Temple in W.P.No.22t57 of 200s. d) The contents of the proceedings of office of the Commissioner, Endowment Department, D.Dis.No.A/45705/2OO4, dated 12.10.2004(referred to and extracted above) The Writ Petition is di so sed of, directinq the 3'd resoondent-Tem ole to take further immediate action as \!! 8 SN. J indicated in the soecific instructions vide rloceedinqs of office of the Commissioner, Endowmenl DeDartment, D.t) rs. No.A 45705 2OO4, dated 12.10.20J + d ider the lequest of the petitioners to r:lease all the pension and other retirement benefits in terms of ( G.O.Ms.No.=839, Revenue Endowment-II) DeDartmen t, the 2nd res onden dated O3.12.1999 as oer the letter, dated ;2.LO.2OO4 of n the counter the 3'd responden,: Temple in affidavit filed bv W.P.No.22157 of 2005, in accordance to law conformitv with Drinciole of natural iustice bv providinq I an opportuni rsonal hearin r :titioners and decide the subiect issue, within a period of four (O4) weeks f rom the date of receiot of coov of I he orcler and om municate the decision to th': c petitio ners. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pendin,; in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed SD'. M.OSMAN ALI BAIG ASS STANT REGISTRAR To, //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue (Endowments) Depar rent, Secretariat, Telangana State Buildings, Hyderabad.

2. The Commissioner of Endowments, Telangana, Boggu z <unta, Tilak Road, Hyderabad

3. The Executive Officer, Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy l:vastanam, Yadagirigutta, Yadadri Bhongir District. t

4. The Audit Officer, State Audit Premises of Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Vari Devastanam, Yadagirigutta, Yadadri Bhongir District 5 One CC to SRI KIRTHI TEJA KONDAVEETI, Advocate. [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES ll, High Court for the State of Telangana.

7. One CC to SRI CH.SATISH KUMAR, SC for Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Devastanam. [OPUC] B. Two CD Copies. BSK PSK HIGH COURT DATED:2811012025 CC TODAY 9" HES ,.{ 1& { 1g i[ll o l i.) , ,l 7 ( ORDER WP.No.32350 of 2023 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS J a.